Ares vs. MCU Ultron

Originally posted by Silent Master
He's purposely misunderstanding what the term full force means.

You are hilariously accepting Etri's words while playing blind man on the feat! But again, that's a common thing of yours when debating Thor.

Hey SM, look what I found!

Originally posted by Silent Master
Statements don't. only feats matter.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Try reading forum rules, it states movie feats only.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Feats >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> statements

Why the sudden change of heart Silent? 😂

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
A statement must have background evidence for it to be valid. Also, the context of the statement plays an important role in it.

Etri saying that Thor was going to get hit by the full power of a star could just as well be a hyperbole.

The feat contradicts Etri's words, as Thor was exposed to a sector of the full beam. But again, nothing suggests Etri was being literal.

Feats > Statements.

The feat that was shown is what the directors interpretation on what they think Thor being hit with the full force of the star would look like to them. They may have not showed the feat in a way that pleases your own view on how it should have gone down but it still is the directors vision on how being hit by a full star under the confines of the Dwarf mechanism would look like.

Besides the feat we have Eitris words/description on what is about to be shown to us on screen. So we have the feat and a description. No guessing is needed.

As far as your "just a portion" nonsense. If i kill a fly with a fly-swatter, you can say, the fly got hit with the full force of the fly swatter when i killed it. Regardless if the fly wasn't as big as the fly-swatters whole head surface area.

Originally posted by Inhuman
The feat that was shown is what the directors interpretation on what they think Thor being hit with the full force of the star would look like to them. They may have not showed the feat in a way that pleases your own view on how it should have gone down but it still is the directors vision on how being hit by a full star under the confines of the Dwarf mechanism would look like.

Besides the feat we have Eitris words/description on what is about to be shown to us on screen. So we have the feat and a description. No guessing is needed.

As far as your "just a portion" nonsense. If i kill a fly with a fly-swatter, you can say, the fly got hit with the full force of the fly swatter when i killed it. Regardless if the fly wasn't as big as the fly-swatters whole head surface area.

Feats > Statements. We debate feats arround here don't we?

You thinking that something is nonesensical doesn't make it a fact. In your fly analogy, the force is being distributed evenly on the entire area of the swatter. The fly is killed by the force delivered by the area of the swatter smashing it. That's why you hear your table banging everytime you kill a fly with a swatter (assuming you kill it on a table); the table also receives a force. Isn't like all the force concentrates on just the fly, ergo the fly isn't receive the FULL FORCE of the swatter. It is common logic .

Want some scientific background?

In a dam, you have these turbines allowing a portion of a river's current through, creating energy. The bigger the turbines, the more current passes at a time, the bigger the amout of power produced.

Isn't like you have the full power of the river being obtained.

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
Feats > Statements. We debate feats arround here don't we?

In Infinity War, there are STATEMENTS about the star feat and the FEAT as well. You have both. get it? So its not just the feat , its also a statement describing the feat.

2>1

Again your own interpretation of the scene doesn't discredit what the directors meant to show in that FEAT. Because they aslo gave us something added to the FEAT. A description of what the audience was looking at on screen.

Its like in a science fiction movie someone says "We are about to go light speed". And after that, the directors show the ship jumping into hyper space with their own interpretation on how going into light speed would look. (Because you know, no one really knows how these space feats would actually look like.)
Then some retard says "Hold on a minute, that didn't look like them going light speed. It looked more like they went into a worm hole and came out the other side. The whole scene didn't convince me it was light speed"

There would be ZERO reason to say something stupid like that because previous to the scene they told you that they were going to go light speed"

Feats with little to no description , I can understand, but they are basically hitting you over head on what is about to happen. For the dunces in the crowd to not be confused. Seems some still do get confused though. 😬

Originally posted by Inhuman
In Infinity War, there are STATEMENTS about the star feat and the FEAT as well. You have both. get it? So its not just the feat , its also a statement describing the feat.

2>1

Again your own interpretation of the scene doesn't discredit what the directors meant to show int hat FEAT. Because they aslo gave us something added to the FEAT. A description of what the audience was looking at on screen.

Its like in a science fiction movie someone says "We are about to go light speed". And after that, the directors show the ship jumping into hyper space with their own interpretation on how going into light speed would look. (Because you know, no one really knows how these space feats would actually look like.)
Then some retard says "Hold on a minute, that didn't look like them going light speed. It looked more like they went into a worm hole and came out the other side. The whole scene didn't convince me it was light speed"

There would be ZERO reason to say something stupid like that because previous to the scene they told you that they were going to go light speed"

Feats with little to no description , I can understand, but they are basically hitting you over head on what is about to happen. For the dunces in the crowd to not be confused. Seems some still do get confused though. 😬

Glad to see that you agree on the fly not receiving the full force of the swatter.

Again, am not refusing the fact that the machine extracts the full force of the star.

Am just pointing at the fact that the feat apparently contradicts Thor receiving the full force of it.

Again, Etri's words aren't necessarily literal, but can be a hyperbole result of him overreacting over Thor's action.

the north of the silent empire is broken by josh and spectres forces its time for h1 to move in, for i see nibe and inhuman furiously marching their armies at...... full force.

eeeaaaaaaaaarh!!!!!!!!!
😛

Eh, not even interested. The characters involved in the star “feat” aren’t even in this thread. :/

Ares can control metal. Ultron would have a hard time just functioning properly.
Ares has lightning ability, which was affecting Ultron when Thor was blasting him.

As far as the star feat, hyperbole exists.
Pro Marvel fans will ignore the fact that it does and assume a non-hyperbole stance when there is evidence to support that it exists.

The scene makes no sense if Etri's words were literal.
Thor experienced no net gravitational forces (he didn’t get pulled in at any point), nor any other type of forces except a push force, which can be calculated.

Originally posted by h1a8
As far as the star feat, hyperbole exists.
Pro Marvel fans will ignore the fact that it does and assume a non-hyperbole stance when there is evidence to support that it exists.

The scene makes no sense if Etri's words were literal.
Thor experienced no net gravitational forces (he didn’t get pulled in at any point), nor any other type of forces except a push force, which can be calculated.

We have no idea how the Dwarf mechanism around the star works. We do know that when you open the iris on the sphere that surrounds the star, that the force of the star comes out.

As far as gravitational forces: Even objects with massive gravitational force shoot out particles, radiation and cosmic rays at very high speeds. Pulsars(these are another version of Neutron Stars), Quasars that have massive black holes in the center still shoot out huge beams of cosmic rays, radiation and particles at great speeds into space.

So space objects like Neutron Stars with HUGE gravitational forces can also shoot out energy at massive speeds.
We dont know if the Duarf mechanism allows all the energy that is stored up inside the sphere around the star to be let all out once the iris is opened. Actually we do know because we are told in the movie.

As far as your "just a portion" nonsense. If i kill a fly with a fly-swatter, you can say, the fly got hit with the full force of the fly swatter when i killed it. Regardless if the fly wasn't as big as the fly-swatters whole head surface area.

Wouldnt have made a difference, he’s never going to get this. 😆

Originally posted by riv6672
I was going to use THAT EXACT SAME ANALOGY yesterday, before going w. the beam gif question.

Wouldnt have made a difference, he’s never going to get this. 😆

👆

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
You are hilariously accepting Etri's words while playing blind man on the feat! But again, that's a common thing of yours when debating Thor.

[B] Hey SM, look what I found!

Why the sudden change of heart Silent? 😂 [/B]

There is no change of heart as the movie also shows us Thor standing right next to the neutron star.

Originally posted by riv6672
I was going to use THAT EXACT SAME ANALOGY yesterday, before going w. the beam gif question.

Wouldnt have made a difference, he’s never going to get this. 😆

The fact that you don't know the power of a river isn't my issue boy.

Just don't go arround saying that a person can take the full power of a river, people is gonna laugh at you 😉

Originally posted by Silent Master
There is no change of heart as the movie also shows us Thor standing right next to the neutron star.

You said that Statements don't count, now you say they do. Not only that, you ignore the feat.

Again, why the change of heart?

Yes, statements by themselves don't matter. they need evidence to back them up. that has always been my stance.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Which is no better than a character statement and those need evidence to back them up or they're ignored.

There is no change of heart, As I'm not arguing that the statement by itself matters. I'm arguing statement + feat.

Originally posted by Silent Master
Yes, statements by themselves don't matter. they need evidence to back them up. that has always been my stance.

There is no change of heart, As I'm not arguing that the statement by itself matters. I'm arguing statement + feat.

If you say so SM.

Either way, thanks for backing my claim.

Nobody has backed up your claim.

Originally posted by Josh_Alexander
No statement should be taken as fact regardless from which movie it is coming, UNLESS there is evidence and logic to back it up.

Thanks SM.

Having said that, Etri's words need feats to back it up.

👆

Originally posted by Silent Master
Nobody has backed up your claim.

I believe he’s just speaking to/agreeing w. himself now.
You guys broke him.